Hi Barras. I only just now noticed the message on my talk page about my de-admin. In fact I was going to resign some months ago, but forgot. Given the long reaction time, I think it's appropriate that I no longer have admin privileges here - I'm obviously not around to take care of things in a timely manner :)

Hi! Nice to see you here anyway. I hope to see you completely back to the project at some point in the future. Until that point, I guess I will hold the fort here. Good luck with whatever you are doing in RL. Best, -Barrastalk 08:33, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Do you think Anglo-Egyptian Sudan should be deleted?--PaulBustion88 (talk) 19:55, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

You must be kidding me. You created the entry and now want to delete going through a RFD? That clearly belongs to the most ridiculous things I've seen here and on any other project I work on for all time. -Barrastalk 21:23, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Its called changing my mind. You never heard of that before?--PaulBustion88 (talk) 21:50, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

The reason I want the change summaries deleted is that an English wikipedia editor is raging war against me because I quoted her criticism of me in the change summaries, and she views it as a personal insult. I'm worried that she'll use my posting about her as an excuse to harass me and argue that the change summaries give her justification to do so. Is that a legitimate reason to have them deleted? --PaulBustion88 (talk) 07:20, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

So, essentially, you want me/us to destroy some kind of "evidence"? If the enwiki user harasses you, then please report to the arbcom on enwiki, they usually take that rather serious. Revision deletions and variations thereof should be used rarely and not for such stuff. -Barrastalk 18:26, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Do you think I'm doing ok at editing for the most part? I think it was a mistake for me to worry about the specific criticisms people made of me on wikipedia and change things based on that, I think I might have made my entries worse when I did that. But over all I think I've done a fairly good job here. I'm hoping to do a good enough job here that in 6 months I can persuade simple English wikipedia to let me back on. PaulBustion88 (talk) 11:12, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

As I'm currently usually between 10 and 14 hours working every day, I sadly don't have the energy to do useful reviews in the evening. -Barrastalk 18:31, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Some of the terms I wrote entries for, such as Jewish Autonomous Oblast, have articles that cover them on English wikipedia, but not on Simple English wikipedia, could I link to the English wikipedia in the article as an alternative, or is that not allowed?PaulBustion88 (talk) 06:13, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Apology. Do you want me to nominate the entries I created that you view as useless for deletion?[change]

Ok, I'm sorry for the bad edits. I didn't know English wiktionary had copyright. Do you want the entries I created that you view as useless to be nominated for deletion? PaulBustion88 (talk) 01:20, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello. I believe I only striked through my comments. Since they're my comments, even though I do not have the right to delete them, I thought that on most wikis a person who regrets communications does have a right to strike them through. Was I mistaken? Since I'm not editing this website anymore the remarks seem pointless to me, so I'd rather strike them out. PaulBustion87 (talk) 10:17, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Would this have been an acceptable method of attribution, stating the dictionary equivalent to this from Simple English wikipedia on the entry's talk page, [1], "This article was partially copied from the English language wikipedia.en:Thelarche"?PaulBustion88 (talk) 10:35, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Since you were upset about having to clean up my mess, I would like to ask, do you think any of my edits were good, or were they all bad? The reason I ask is that will help me make up my mind if I want to edit here again or not. PaulBustion88 (talk) 10:38, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Paul, this is a fairly small, relatively quiet wiki. It's nice to have people take an interest in it and try to help out. It's pretty common for those who do start editing here to do so without really understanding the needs of the wiki. Like you, they tend to focus on rare words, add encyclopedic content, violate copyright, and write in a style that is not particularly simple. Some of them gradually figure out what they should be doing, but many just leave. I think Barras was unnecessarily hard on you, but perhaps there are things going on elsewhere that I haven't seen. I haven't gone through all your entries, but I expect there is useful stuff there. It would be much more useful if you revisited them and worked on simplifying them, writing definitions in sentences instead of phrases, and cleaned up the formatting. It would be even more useful if you did stick around, took the time to develop the ability to write clear, simple, accurate entries, and continued to contribute.--Brett (talk) 11:46, 16 May 2015 (UTC)